tkbslc

Lives in United States Salt Lake City, UT, United States
Joined on May 30, 2008

Comments

Total: 3822, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Huawei's Honor Note 8 comes with 6.6" Quad-HD screen (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

caerphoto: It'd be handy to specify the actual pixels. All these XGA, QuadHD, SuperVGA abbreviations get confusing after 20 years of it.

Sure, but 4K is also "Quad" HD. It's just Quad 1080p vs Quad 720p.

Not to mention there is qHD which is "quarter HD" and it's a quarter of 1080p (960x540).

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2016 at 03:25 UTC
On article Huawei's Honor Note 8 comes with 6.6" Quad-HD screen (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

BigBen08: Seems odd they use the name Note. Samsung has a line of Note phones.

And Xiaomi just came out with a super slim aluminum notebook called the "air". I wonder where they get these ideas?

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2016 at 03:21 UTC
In reply to:

Emadn13: one of the worst focals,come on samyang give us your magic the 85mm

Those would end up as pretty atypical focal lengths on APS-C and 2x crop.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 22:41 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: I briefly owned the 50mm f1.2 from this series and the optics were superb. It was very sharp right from f1.2. However, I found it difficult to focus accurately, even with focus peaking and the like. In the end I traded a little bit of aperture for autofocus, which is extremely accurate on mirrorless.

I feel like most people would be better served with the new Sigma 30mm f1.4 that just came out. An imperceptible amount of additional DOF control isn't worth a lot of ruined shots. At least it wasn't to me.

It's easier on a mirrorless, true. But my main complaint was that these kinds of focal lengths are typically for active scenes. Street, candids, kids, etc. And focus peaking on my Olympus and Panasonic are NOT accurate at f1.2. Pretty good at f2. So I had to use the magnifier box. This allows great precision, but blocks off most of the viewfinder so you can't compose and find the "decisive moment" as it is put.

For my fisheye or a wide angle or a macro, manual focus is great. I can take my time to compose and using the focusing aids doesn't result in missed shots very often.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 22:39 UTC
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: Wow... my eyes lit up when I saw "New Samyang 35mm mirrorless lens"...

Imagine my disappointment when I saw that it wasn't for Sony FE. There are already a truckload of 35mms for mirrorless and 35mm isn't even a very useful FL for MFT. Blah.

Still holding out hope for a mirrorless full frame 35 F/2 with autofocus. If it can be done for <300g and $500 I will buy it tomorrow.

Well there are several mirrorless formats with APS-C sensors where 35mm is a normal prime. I'm sure that's the primary target for this focal length.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 19:03 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: If this is any good and the price is right I think it would make an excellent lens for the Fuji XT2.

It's not likely to be much cheaper than the AF 35mm f1.4.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 19:02 UTC

I briefly owned the 50mm f1.2 from this series and the optics were superb. It was very sharp right from f1.2. However, I found it difficult to focus accurately, even with focus peaking and the like. In the end I traded a little bit of aperture for autofocus, which is extremely accurate on mirrorless.

I feel like most people would be better served with the new Sigma 30mm f1.4 that just came out. An imperceptible amount of additional DOF control isn't worth a lot of ruined shots. At least it wasn't to me.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 19:01 UTC as 15th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

SimenO1: Too bad it doesn't support any DSLRs

They make dozens of SLR lenses.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 18:58 UTC

I thought the selfie stick already solved this one

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2016 at 15:56 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Any folks here remember the time when FAST glass was for capturing moments in really LOW light and not be obsessed with OOF Bokeh?

What? Don't tell me they're all retired! Noooo!

.

Not a tired argument if you shoot a lot of different things. An f4 lens can't shoot f1.4, but the reverse is true. Options are nice.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 07:50 UTC
In reply to:

villagranvicent: This obsession to shoot people at f0.00001to isolate them from the back is so 90's.

Yeah, but a $200 prime will give you differentiation from a smartphone.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 03:59 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Any folks here remember the time when FAST glass was for capturing moments in really LOW light and not be obsessed with OOF Bokeh?

What? Don't tell me they're all retired! Noooo!

.

You may not be aware of this, but fast lenses can shoot slow apertures too!

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 03:58 UTC
In reply to:

Lars V: Allison: Curious - if f/1.4 makes it the fastest AF telephoto prime on the market, is Canon's 85/1.2 then not a telephoto?

........If only it was the 86L.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 03:56 UTC
In reply to:

AngularJS: Superb lens! Those 105 mm head shots now make much more sense compared to the distorted ones from the 50mm Zony 50 f/1.4.

But they would look better at f5.6, I think.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 03:54 UTC

Four out of five of these shots would be better if you'd stopped down 1-2 stops.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 03:53 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

noisephotographer: Dxomark is not reliable when it comes to smartphones. One should not pay attention to them. I wonder why dpreview mentions this as dxomark's reputation is very bad when it comes to smartphones. Sony's smartphones clearly have mediocre cameras as well as Motorola's devices.
It is likely that they get paid by Sony. Dpreview should not support this kind of advertising!

They show sample photos and data. If you have any counter evidence, feel free to share it. Otherwise you are just a man in a tin foil hat.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 22:10 UTC
In reply to:

ceremus: Good lord. That'll have a shallower DoF than the Canonball 85 1.2

500m f4 beats 200mm f2.

Wait, what are we doing now?

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 19:18 UTC
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: 105mm and ... f/1.4? What a waste of glass.
Why not f/2 and make it more bijou and optically superior for digital?
But modern faux-Avedons and pretentious videographers wouldn't know what it means, so give them the f/1.4 because that is all they know.

Meyer Optik makes awesome Bijou lenses with slow apertures. And they even have a Triplet of elements! Wow, must be made Just for you!

http://www.meyer-optik-goerlitz.com/kickstarter_trioplan/

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 05:12 UTC
In reply to:

Johann3s: This is a great lens, I always like it when manufacturers come with new innovative lens designs. Keep it up!

http://asklens.com/2016/07/nikon-105mm-f1-4-nikons-new-king-bokeh/

At this link you can actually see some numbers where the bokeh/blur abilities of this lens are compared with some other Nikon primes. I think these results show very well what a nice achievement this lens is.

I think it is funny to put bar graphs on there like "your photos will be 1.35x better with this lens!".

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 05:08 UTC
In reply to:

cntlaw: The 100 dollar 105mm f2.5 AI had been the most popular l portrait lens in the 70s. The new lens surely means something to celebrate Nikon 100 million lenses milestone !

According to this old price list: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/RF-Nikkor/RF-Accessories/Instructions/images/nFprlst1960.JPG

The original 105mm f2.5 cost $195 in 1962. That's about $1550 converted to today's money using the CPI inflation calculator.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 05:04 UTC
Total: 3822, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »